We Need To Come Up With Another Word For Positive/Good Earmarks.......

[global1]

The term 'earmark' has taken on a negative connotation. I'm thinking this is thanks to John McCain. There are bad earmarks and just plain pork and then there are 'good' earmarks that are necessary to the national interest of the country, a state, a city, a town, etc.

We need to come up with a term for 'good' earmarks that doesn't use 'earmarks' or 'pork'.

The Repugs have taken that term and are using it against President Obama - yet they are taking advantage and putting in their own 'earmarks' and 'pork'. They vote against the bill knowing that it will pass anyway - now they can have it both ways. They can say they voted against this excessive spending by the President and the Dems - yet they can go to their constituency and say - look - it was me that got that road repaired or the bridge repaired, etc.

I'm for scrutinizing all the add-ons and let them stand or fail based on their merit. Those that fail - are pork or earmarks (now that it has a negative connotation). Those that pass muster - need to be named something more positive - what could that term be.

[Kdillard]

1. I agree. I liked what President Obama had to say today regarding

reforming the ear mark system and hopefully we will be getting people to understand the difference between good earmarks and what are wasteful earmarks. I am sick of republicans using it to confuse and mislead people. As for a new name for good earmarks call them state investments or something like that.

[Jackpine Radical]

2. Investments in infrastructure.

Building for our kids.

[valerief]

3. Common good allocation vs. Political gain allocation. nt

[PBS Poll-435]

4. Public Works Projects

Local Investment.


Something like that? :shrug:

[POAS]

5. Targeted spending n/t

[livvy]

6. I agree, a better name is needed. How 'bout one of these?

How about something like "seeds" or "seedlings", which suggests growth and has a positive connotation?

[terisan]

8. Welcome to 1984. nt

[livvy]

9. No, it is framing, but not the type we have been subjected to the last eight years...

which are lies prettied up with a catchy and deceptive name. If the intention of the bill is to stimulate economic growth and provide jobs, it is a reasonable name that is short and easy to remember.

Just brainstorming here, which I thought was the intent of the thread. :shrug:

[global1]

12. You're Right - My Intent Was To Have DU'ers Brainstorm To Come Up With.....

a new word for 'positive or good earmarks' as the Repugs and McCain made the current term 'earmarks' a dirty word. So far I'm liking 'targeted spending' and I have to say 'eyemarks' is certainly interesting. 'Progressive spending' as someone has suggested might backfire as it could be associated with the Progressive Movement and again turned into a negative by the Repugs.

Bottom line - not all 'earmarks' as we now term them are bad.

The ones that make it through the scrutiny of the President's criteria - would be deemed 'worthy' and should be called something that doesn't have a negative tag attached to them.

[terisan]

13. I see . Just didn't want the Bush "Clean Water Act" type names that masked the

bill's pollution-friendly intent.

[terisan]

7. Earmarks are basically Corruption. Let's not do the Lipstick/Pig thing. nt

There may be good causes and these can be prososed, fully discussed , and passed or voted down.

[midnight]

10. Progressive spending. Patriotic spending.

[patriotvoice]

11. "Eyemark", because positive allocations have "vision." EOM